[All] Discussion with Ecojustice re: Ministry decision

[c d Moulton]

That group exists or at least it did.   It is called HHUG -- Homelessness
and Housing Umbrella Group.   I know that the YWCA and Lutherwood have been
active in it

deaun

On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 9:03 PM, Eleanor Grant <eleanor7000 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Greg has a point.  I sure wish KW had a group focussed on Housing issues!
> I would question how socially useful it is to build townhouses in an area
> that's not accessible by transit and never will be.  It sounds like
> somebody just trying to make more money.  The environmentally relevant
> thing would be the number of homes (ie vehicles) in a protected area.
>
> Eleanor
> On 18 Jul 2016 15:05, "Gregory C. Michalenko" <gcmichalenko at uwaterloo.ca>
> wrote:
>
>> RE:  2 luxury lots vs 20 town houses.I don't think it is wise for GREN to
>> get mixed up in a residential housing dispute.  This one appears to be
>> class-based NIMBY, a few millionaires wanting to defend their own interests
>> vs people they deem less worthy of consideration as human beings.
>>
>>  Waterloo Region currently has a list of over 4,000 families needing
>> socially assisted housing, and there is also a great need for town housing
>> for people with modest means.  Surely the needs of people like that should
>> be the highest priority.  I recently went to the grand opening of a new
>> community garden in Preston in a two-year old social housing development
>> consisting of several apartment buildings.  It took much effort to clear
>> all the administrative and legal hurdles to get the garden going.  The
>> stories of the resident-gardeners were very moving:  "I'm no longer lonely
>> - I've made friends though the garden', "I know so many more neighbours
>> now", "It's so good to build something together and be out in the fresh
>> air".
>>
>> That is what neighbourhoods should be about:  building bridges, not
>> walls.   Donald Trump builds walls.  We don't.
>>   We should just ignore this housing dispute, and not take either side.
>> It has nothing to do with GREN.
>> - Greg Michalenko
>> ------------------------------
>> *From:* All [all-bounces at gren.ca] on behalf of water.lulu at yahoo.ca [
>> water.lulu at yahoo.ca]
>> *Sent:* Monday, July 18, 2016 12:29 PM
>> *To:* GREN >
>> *Subject:* [All] Discussion with Ecojustice re: Ministry decision
>>
>> Hi folks
>>
>> Just got off the phone with Ecojustice staff today. We discussed the
>> MOECC minister's decision regarding the Part II order request for Hidden
>> Valley and explored the options for potential follow up.
>>
>> First off, some of the responses by the Minister were rather vague in
>> nature. There are passages where they say they are satisfied with results
>> but lack specificity as to why they are satisfied. What evidence is there
>> to prove the concern has been reasonably addressed? That is the kind of
>> analysis we need to do on that Minister's decision.
>>
>> Some of the issues I raised are the fact that they admit Schneider's
>> creek is going to be the discharge point for fisheries yet they admit it is
>> the only fish habitat in the area and they lack specificity on how they
>> will protect that area from additional salt loading.  They are going to
>> implement a salt mitigation strategy for Hidden Valley to divert salt
>> runoff to the river but how will that impact the water quality and water
>> flow of the interior water features if this water is going somewhere else?
>> Those are the kind of questions we can raise with the MOECC. She encouraged
>> me to continue to have dialogue with the Ministry about those issues.
>>
>> Because specific legislation on the criteria for habitat requirements has
>> yet to be defined, we can't demand critical habitat delineation for some of
>> the species found in Hidden Valley yet. Until they make it law as they did
>> for Jefferson Salamanders, it is a challenge to get protection for them at
>> this time but never the less they will likely still require an exemption
>> under section 17 of the Endangered Species Act (kill permit process) if
>> they want to encroach upon likely habitat areas.
>>
>> There is a group of local residents including Ayman Samara who live
>> currently around Hidden Valley Dr. who want to protect the natural features
>> of the area and make sure that multi-unit townhouse projects are not
>> happening in the area. (Developer Dan Sack is behind that move wanting to
>> put 40 townhouse units on 2 luxery lots). I mentioned this to Ecojustice
>> and they advised the first step is to formalize incorporation. The process
>> can be done for free through Pro Bono law Ontario this way if the community
>> group run into any issues it provides them with a measure of addressing
>> economic or legal threats from developers. If they wish to pay for
>> incorporation it is usually around $60 to do it.
>>
>> In terms of buyout of Hidden Valley for $2 million she recommended we
>> approach the GRCA to look into the land acquisition and work with the
>> community group to launch a Kickstarter to raise funds to help make it
>> happen. She said grant monies in Ontario for land acquisitions are very
>> difficult to find. Southwestern Ontario is a really hard place to protect.
>>
>> Currently OMB reform is taking place. Ecojustice is looking at ways to
>> reducing the bullying of the public and municipalities into supporting non
>> sustainable projects.  Laura Bowman at Ecojustice has their position paper
>> on it. We spoke about Waterloo's issues at length. I'll get the paper from
>> her and relay.
>>
>> The Environmental Bill of Rights is currently under review and their
>> staff person handling that position paper is named John Swaigen. I'll try
>> to get in touch with him on that too.
>>
>> Also being updated this fall is the policy for Environmental Assessment.
>> One of the things we discussed is the need to sequence conservation
>> strategies before approvals, not after. So many times conservation measures
>> are to be implemented in the detailed design stage but if constraints are
>> found after approvals it clearly shows a pro development bias. Proper
>> delineations and prevention should logically occur before approvals to make
>> sure ecological features are reasonably protected as early as possible to
>> avoid costs on all sides.
>>
>> I mentioned concerns about how our primary recharge located away from
>> existing wellheads are not being reasonably protected. Developers target
>> the hummocky hills to exploit the gravel to offset building costs and
>> unlike a quarry they don't need a permit to do it.  I also told her how we
>> are currently excluded from the Greenbelt plans yet we have growth
>> pressures without the proof to show we have the water budget to support
>> this anticipated growth. I told her I'd like to do an EBR request to better
>> plan our future water budget. She advised we use the Clean Water Act and
>> the Planning Act as the basis of that request.
>>
>> I told her many quarry pits pose a risk to the Primary Recharge areas. We
>> have ESL laws locally but are told by the Province that these areas are
>> still at risk for potential gravel extractions. What can we do to avert the
>> risks to our groundwater supplies? She stated that the City and Regional
>> levels control zoning laws. It is at the local level that ARA zoning laws
>> are set. If the lands are not zoned for aggregates locally extractions
>> won't happen on those lots. (We have more power over that issue than I was
>> led to believe previously!)
>>
>> So all in all it was a wonderful meeting. We have more power than we
>> thought to influence outcomes particularly in regards to source water
>> protection so keep hammering folks!
>>
>> Lulu :0)
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> All mailing list
>> All at gren.ca
>> http://gren.ca/mailman/listinfo/all_gren.ca
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> All mailing list
> All at gren.ca
> http://gren.ca/mailman/listinfo/all_gren.ca
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gren.ca/pipermail/all_gren.ca/attachments/20160718/d5003cb2/attachment.html>